Xeon Gold 6530 vs Silver 4208

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Silver 4208
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 85 Watt
7.08
Xeon Gold 6530
2023
32 cores / 64 threads, 270 Watt
41.26
+483%

Xeon Gold 6530 outperforms Xeon Silver 4208 by a whopping 483% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking99161
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation18.4956.73
Market segmentServerServer
SeriesIntel Xeon Silverno data
Power efficiency7.8814.46
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Emerald Rapids (2023)
Release date2 April 2019 (5 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$417$2,128

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Xeon Gold 6530 has 207% better value for money than Xeon Silver 4208.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores8 (Octa-Core)32 (Dotriaconta-Core)
Threads1664
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz4 GHz
Multiplier21no data
L1 cache512 KB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache8 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache11 MB160 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data2x 763 mm2
Maximum core temperature78 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration2 (Multiprocessor)2
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA4677
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt270 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® AMX, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-no data
Deep Learning Boost++

Security technologies

Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
SGXno dataYes with Intel® SPS
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530 are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR5 @ 4800 MT/s (1 DPC)
Maximum memory size1 TB4 TB
Max memory channels68
Maximum memory bandwidth115.212 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes4880

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Xeon Silver 4208 7.08
Xeon Gold 6530 41.26
+483%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Xeon Silver 4208 11247
Xeon Gold 6530 65533
+483%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.08 41.26
Recency 2 April 2019 14 December 2023
Physical cores 8 32
Threads 16 64
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 270 Watt

Xeon Silver 4208 has 217.6% lower power consumption.

Xeon Gold 6530, on the other hand, has a 482.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

The Xeon Gold 6530 is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Silver 4208 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Silver 4208 and Xeon Gold 6530, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon Silver 4208
Xeon Silver 4208
Intel Xeon Gold 6530
Xeon Gold 6530

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 38 votes

Rate Xeon Silver 4208 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Silver 4208 or Xeon Gold 6530, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.